Last week, in a move that took many by surprise, Starbucks sent a letter to the union representing some of its workers, saying it wants to have contracts in place by next year.
The letter to Workers United contradicts what has been the pattern at unionized stores. A hearing before a National Labor Relations Board judge in Seattle is currently underway about whether Starbucks has illegally refused to meet with workers.
John Logan, head of labor studies at San Francisco State University, said there’s reason to doubt Starbucks’ sincerity.
"Starbucks is continuing to fight the union campaign using any methods lawful or unlawful that it can use to try to crush the organizing campaign," Logan said.
Logan points to the recent hiring of superstar attorney Lisa Blatt as a sign that the company intends to keep fighting. She’s been tasked with handling a case involving the National Labor Relations Board that could go before the U.S. Supreme Court. The case has to do with a lower court’s directive to rehire seven pro-union workers in Memphis.
It’s been two years since the first Starbucks store voted overwhelmingly to unionize. Since then, approximately 370 stores across the country have voted in favor of unionization. None, however, have managed to reach a first collective bargaining agreement.
Logan said even if Starbucks does sign off on contracts next year, the quality of the agreements matter.
"We really have to think about what that means, because if Starbucks were to reach some kind of mediocre labor contract with the 300-plus stores that have unionized so far, that did not involve a commitment to stop its unlawful union busting, I would say that contract is actually not worth very much," Logan said.
Logan believes that without Starbucks signing on to provisions that would affirm the right to organize, other workers might decide it’s not worth it to form a union. Especially since Starbucks has already offered certain pay hikes and benefits exclusively to nonunion employees. A National Labor Relations Board judge recently ruled that move was illegal.
Logan added one tactic that might still be possible is a national boycott of the coffee chain, but said that might have worked better when the union drive was in its earlier stages and most dynamic.
"Starbucks has paid a price and its reputation has been damaged. But I don't think it's paid a big enough price," Logan said.
Lynne Fox, the president of Workers United, said she and others are reviewing Starbucks' letter but that "anything that moves bargaining forward in a positive way is most welcome."
